Molecular Moments - Rick Briscoe v1.mp3: this mp3 audio file was automatically transcribed by Sonix with the best speech-to-text algorithms. This transcript may contain errors.
Narrator:
Welcome to the Molecular Moments podcast.
Chad:
In today's episode, we sit down with our guest, Dr. Rick Brisco, senior VP of Safety Assessment and Research Operations at Sarah L Therapeutics. Rick is a 25 year veteran of the pharmaceutical industry with stints in academia, CRO, big Pharma and biotech. In his academic research and throughout his pharma career, he is focused on developing a further understanding for how neurodegenerative diseases work and how to develop drugs to target the very challenging field of neuroscience. Rick has a true passion for this field that I think you'll feel throughout our conversation. So as always, we're talking science as scientists do. And without further ado, here's another episode of Molecular Moments. Welcome to the podcast, Rick. I'm delighted to have you join me today. Can you just start with giving us some highlights from your career?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. Thanks, Chad. Really appreciate the time today. So I've had an interesting career, as you mentioned, in in a variety of settings on the pharmaceutical big pharmaceutical side, the CRO side, and now the biotech side. And that's given me sort of a really broad perspective to understand the business in a way that a lot of people that are just in one segment probably don't. So I started out I was a postdoc at the University of Michigan, and after a few years there in the pharmacology department, I was recruited to a CRO. And at that location I spent about three years building up a lab lab team. And after that stint I got recruited to Merck. I was at Merck for about 17 years, did various jobs at Merck, headed the safety pharmacology group for a few years. I also worked on a rotational assignment for about two years in corporate strategy and so I reported into the strategy office supporting the CEO. That was a pretty interesting opportunity during the Schering-Plough Merck integration. And then about three years ago, I got recruited to come to Siravo in the biotech space, and we're a startup based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, that focuses on neuroscience, small molecule, drug development.
Chad:
Wow, that's awesome and great sort of intro to what? To what you've done. I want to even step it back a little bit, though, because I'm interested in what got you into science. What was your motivation? Right. And for those of our audience who haven't figured it out, you're my brother, my big brother. So I was there watching some of the action as you were growing up. And I'd love to hear from you. What got you into science? What was your motivation from early on? We've heard some really interesting stories from some of our guests, and I'd like to hear you tell that side of it as well.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah, So, you know, it really goes back to I've always been very curious about how things work in the world. When I was young, you know, I was always exploring biology in the environment, spent many summers at a nature center de camp at the local nature center and did many things playing in the mud and ponds with various creatures. But that really was one of the starting points for me to really get interested in biology. Then I sort of transitioned into high school and I discovered that I didn't really like school because it was boring. But yet one thing that I did start doing in high school was scuba diving. And scuba diving really ignited a really different interest in biology for me in terms of marine biology. And all of the diversity in the ocean was really intriguing to me. And so, you know, it was really those experiences early on that started me down the path of being interested in science. And then I didn't really know what I wanted to do. I went to college for undergrad and I discovered a professor there, Gary Dunbar, who was starting up a neuroscience lab, and I became really interested in neuroscience pretty much from the early part of my freshman year of college, and it was all all downhill from there, so to speak.
Chad:
All downhill or all uphill. So that was at Central Michigan. Central Michigan University, right in Mount Pleasant. Yeah. Yeah. And that's that's amazing. And just a little tidbit since we are brothers, I would say I remember many nights at the, at the kitchen table studying right where as you slowly as you moved along. So it's interesting you bring that up because I think that experiential learning is so important and it's so important to some people where where they get their motivation from from. The experiential side, and it takes a while until that clicks with people. And how do you apply that and have a career? Because no matter what that start was or what your grades were in, in high school, which clearly got you into it, into a good university and a good situation, you've been successful by any measure of of a career for sure.
Dr. Rick:
So yeah, absolutely. Yeah. You know, speaking on the experiential side, one thing, while I was in college, it was probably the most pivotal experience for me to really decide to go into neuroscience. Drug development was I spent a couple of years working at a transitional living facility for chronic mentally ill adults in that facility. These were people that were very mentally challenged, ill people, schizophrenia, very severe schizophrenia. And I really learned a lot about these patients. They're just people that are really struggling to to live a normal life, struggling with schizophrenia and other chronic mental illnesses. And I saw how the medications they were taking really made an impact, both positive and unfortunately negative, because there are a lot of side effects of those medications. And one one patient in particular, she was a really nice person that was really struggling with schizophrenia. And she went on a new medication called chlorophyll at the time. And closer it was a newer anti psychotic that had a lot of promise for tremendous efficacy. And she went from a person that was pretty pretty much incapacitated, not able to live independently. And then she went on chloral and within a couple of months was almost back to being able to live independently. It was just a shocking transformation to see. And then I discovered one of the big problems with a lot of psychiatric medicines are that there are potentially bad side effects. And she got a side effect from that medicine called a granular psychosis, which basically causes your white blood cells to to die off. And so that's potentially a fatal condition. And she had to go off that medication. And so that experience with that one patient was really the thing I tracked back to wanting to do better for patients. And it really changed my thinking of what I wanted to do long term. And I wanted to develop new anti psychotics and I've been doing that ever since.
Chad:
Yeah. So I want I want to hear more about that because the CNS space is so challenging, right? Anything in neuroscience, any, any of the drugs in that space are so challenging. So can you just talk in general about what the various challenges are, what the state of the market is, the right way to put it, but kind of the state of the market and why, you know, and then maybe leverage that. I'm curious why why Sayreville is going to win in that space, to the extent you can talk about that as well.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So, you know, with a lot of indications like oncology, for example, there are a lot of really good opportunities for accessible biomarkers. There's something you know, in a blood test that can be developed, that can track a genotyping, that can be, you know, identify the tumor type that really gets to the root of the physiology in the pharmacology. You need to treat those indications. One of the biggest challenges with neuroscience is the brain, as we know, is extremely complex and doesn't offer a lot of opportunities for really robust biomarkers. A lot of neuropsychiatric conditions basically have expert evaluation using basically questionnaires that help characterize the symptoms, and then the clinician would put a patient on a given medication. We've gotten better over the years. Now we're using pet tracers to do PET imaging to look at receptor occupancy in the brain so we can really understand where our medicines are are going. But still, that's at a receptor level and it's not the integrated physiology of the brain. It's really looking at very localized displacement from targets. And so it's really I think neuroscience is really lacking the ability to have really robust biomarkers. That's been the challenge, I think overall.
Chad:
Yeah, and the few that are out there are not very specific to a certain disease, right? I think they're more of a sort of different brain activity and response to general modifications. I was just I was just reading an article about some different biomarkers for CNS and the point of the article, without getting into too many details, was really focused on, hey, we found biomarkers that are specific to this particular disease, which is really unique. So yeah, so continues to be sort of the Holy Grail.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah, absolutely. You know what we're trying to do? It's arrival. We're really trying to characterize pathways in the brain and modulate receptor systems in a very specific way. Traditional anti psychotics, for example, often modulate multiple transmitter systems. And what that causes is a lot of off target. Effects or undesired effects. Metabolic syndrome and obesity are real. Common weight gain is a real common issue with a lot of psychiatric medications, and we're trying to modulate in a more specific way than traditional therapies.
Chad:
Yeah, that's that's fantastic. I think the story of survival just from the standpoint of of how a company is sort of born, I think is somewhat interesting and unique. Is that something you can you can tell us a little bit about how SERVAL came about?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So Pfizer had been developing a very broad neuroscience portfolio for many, many years and had made the business decision several years ago to divest that portfolio of assets. And, you know, they'd been working in that field for probably 20 years or more. And the assets in particular that we are formed from were good 20 years of research. And so when they divested that portfolio, they they partnered with Bain Capital to form CARAVEL. And so it was a partnership between Pfizer and Bain that initially formed the company. And the assets that we started out with were all Pfizer molecules. And so now we're a publicly traded company. Initially, we're a private company. And we also have, in addition to the Pfizer assets, a robust early discovery pipeline of our own for our own molecules. Now.
Chad:
Yeah, that's exciting. And so maybe we'll just have you step back a little bit to Merck again, because I'm interested in your role at at Caravel. But I wanted to step back and hear more about what you did at Merck and then maybe we can step into Caravel and just kind of understand how this space, this safety pharmacology space works and what what you did there to to move it forward.
Dr. Rick:
Sure. Yeah. So at Merck, you know, my initial few years there were heading up the global Safety pharmacology group. So the basic idea of that team of researchers was to do initial safety testing for first in human dosing. So we wanted to make sure our our medications or potential medications were safe for phase one clinical trials. Volunteers, as you know, phase one studies in the small molecule space tend to be very small. Phase one studies, you know, maybe eight or ten subjects at a time. Very carefully controlled studies. But so what we would do is characterize the basic profile to let the clinicians know what to monitor for or what to worry about and pay attention to, to make sure our subjects were very safe. Over the years, I transitioned to a broader role where I was responsible for the overall safe non clinical safety package, not just the first in human enabling package. You know, I would follow compound through from early discovery all the way through to post-marketing monitoring in terms of the safety profile. So I did that for about 17 years.
Chad:
Yeah. So in the in the CNS space, I guess as you mentioned, a lot of that is looking at the off target effects and the side effects are the CNS drugs generally safe, but they have too many side effects that that almost seems like a contradiction to say it, but maybe.
Dr. Rick:
One of the. Yeah, I know. I mean one of the biggest challenges are that your modulating receptor systems that are ubiquitous throughout the body. So you may have, you know, you're trying to modulate dopamine in the brain, for example, in the striatum for Parkinson's disease. Right. You know, there's also dopamine receptors throughout the body outside the brain. And so when you're modulating a receptor system and not being real specific, you can cause actually on target undesired pharmacology. And so by by learning more about the brain and targeting receptors that are more localized in the brain, only you can reduce those broader adverse effects or even on target undesired effects. The other problem is you're modulating to basically what you're doing with neuroscience is you're taking basically normal brain physiology in some cases, and you're trying to modulate only very specific things. You're trying to block hallucinations or you're trying to change motor problems and you're hitting the whole brain, not just those very specific regions of the brain. And so you get a lot of undesired effects that way.
Chad:
Yeah. So I recall a drug that I worked on, and as you know, I'm a mass spectrometry bioanalytical scientist by training. And I don't recall if it was a originally a CNS drug. And then it they found that there were more positive indications in a in a IBS or if it went the other way, if it was. Ibs and wasn't working. And they found some some indications in the brain. And and that was the first time, again, going back probably 20 years in my career that I went, oh, I didn't I didn't realize there were similar receptors in your brain and your gut. Right. Could be hit.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah, that's actually that highlights. One of the big problems is the blood brain barrier. So to get a good penetration into the brain, a lot of times you have to load up the periphery with drug and so you have a higher exposure in the periphery which potentially enables adverse effects that are less desired in the periphery relative to the amount that gets in the brain. So you have to have a really good penetration through the blood brain barrier. Ideally, you have basically a 1 to 1 ratio, but that's that's a very challenging proposition to do.
Chad:
Yeah. So speaking of crossing the blood brain barrier, when I think of state of the art and drug development, I think of biologics and, and more recently gene therapy and that's been CNS has been a tough spot to utilize biologics and gene therapy. Is that an area where Sayreville is looking to to explore that space?
Dr. Rick:
Well, right now all of our clinical assets are small molecules that are have great, really good brain penetration. And so what we would be interested in is we identify a disease that we're interested in and we would figure out what modality would be appropriate to target that disease. If it was a monoclonal, we would be interested in exploring that potentially or small molecule. So although our our clinical portfolio is small molecule at the time, at this time we would be sort of modality agnostic if there was an opportunity that arose in our discovery portfolio to look at an alternative modality. But one of the big challenges, as I'm sure you're aware, is monoclonal is only get in about 0.1% exposure into the brain. And so you have to really load up a dose with milligram quantities, which is very expensive for cost of goods, as well as loading up just a lot of extra antibody to modulate an intra brain target in that way. It's certainly possible, but it's very challenging.
Chad:
Yeah, it makes a lot of sense. So so I wanted to ask you then about survival. So I mean, we've talked a lot about several, but your transition to survival, I guess they lured you up there from Philadelphia up to the up to Massachusetts to Cambridge area. You know what for you made it exciting to join survival specifically. And what's your role there now as a as a senior VP at Sarah?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So you know what I really learned from Big Pharma? It's not just Merck, but I think it's all all the big pharmaceutical companies, they have a lot of overhead and a lot of inefficiencies that I really wanted to try and try and figure out a better way. So the thing that really intrigued me with Sara Vella was the assets that it was formed with were very well evaluated, very intentionally designed, very carefully designed by Pfizer scientists. But I wanted to come in and explore a way to develop drugs that's capital efficient. And what I mean by that is the cost of pharmaceuticals, as we know, are very, very high. And it's a big burden to patients. And it might what I want to do is I want to provide new medicines to patients. We want to make them affordable. Drug development is super expensive. And so there's got to be a way to do that that's more capital efficient. And so Sara, Val offered an opportunity in my mind to potentially develop drugs, bring them to market in a way that is more cost efficient than a large company could do a little bit more nimbly than a large company could do. And so that was one of the big reasons I came to. Sara Well, my whole career has been on neuroscience and the portfolio of assets we had. The opportunity was just really, really exciting. And so that's that's how I ended up coming up to Sara Val from Merck.
Chad:
And so can you talk a little bit about about your role there? And and I know it's expanded in the last couple of years and you're growing your group and then what what do you tell people about Sara Val when they're probably some of the same things that excited you but what do you tell people that that you want to join, join Caravel and become a part of your team or the or the Sara Val team?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So my my role right now is I'm responsible for non clinical safety evaluation of all of our molecules before they go into humans. But also we do work all throughout the development process to ensure the safety of the molecules. So I have a team that that works on that. And then I also have a research operations group that supports with project management activities for the non clinical scientists to keep things organized, you know, people at keep all of our CRO relationships. Organized. As you know, that can be very complicated to keep all that business side of things going for scientists. I also have the laboratory facilities folks reported to me and each and so environmental health and safety. So I'm the site head for the laboratory. And so I'm responsible for all of the infrastructure related to keeping the the labs going. We've got a very busy in vitro biology and chemistry and laboratories in Cambridge.
Chad:
Very cool. What what therapeutic areas? You know, we just talked broadly about CAS, but what therapeutic area specifically is is Sarah Val working in?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So we've got a number of areas of interest. So one of our late stage phase three molecules to fap, Don is being studied for Parkinson's disease. So symptomatic relief of Parkinson's disease. We have a couple other assets, one one called Miracle, adding that is for we're hoping for schizophrenia. So that's in phase two trials right now for schizophrenia. And then we've got another asset named Greg Abbott and that is being studied for epilepsy currently.
Chad:
Okay, this is kind of a random question, but I could imagine we have listeners that that don't really know how this works. So drugs get these crazy names right? To Don Emrick Ledeen I can't. I didn't write down the third one. I can't remember it. But can you talk a little bit about how those names happen?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah, So those are all what would be considered sort of the chemical names or the generic names, so to speak.
Chad:
I'm a chemist, So those wouldn't be the chemical names. No, no, no, no, no, no. They're not the iupac names.
Dr. Rick:
No, no, no. That's true. Yeah, but there's a there's an international body that helps name new molecules. And so at a point usually around phase two clinical development timeframe, a company will submit a request for a generic name. And that package of information goes into this this body, and they assign the name based on the target. So if there are similar molecules in the class, they'll have kind of similar naming conventions. So to wrap it on would have a name similar to another dopamine, one partial agonist, for example, if others existed. So that's how the generic name is established. So it's a sort of a regulatory process. And then when you submit for marketing approval, you have to put a package together for what your branded name would be, and that's more of a marketing type process. And so there are firms that specialize in naming pharmaceuticals. And so even Big Pharma's engage these specialty companies for naming drugs. And it's a pretty long process. You have to come up with four or five options that you think are appropriate, and it's got to meet all kinds of restrictions. It can't be offensive in various languages. It can't sound too commercial. It's got to be a unique name in the in that class of drugs so it doesn't get confused with other drugs. It's a pretty big process, but it's rather interesting how it happens. Then you get these sometimes very unusual names.
Chad:
Yeah, I suppose. Well, you saw a couple of drugs, I think in your Merck time go from really early on to to actual marketing and post marketing and things like that. So you you've seen that whole process, which is certainly a I would say it's one of the coolest things about working in the pharma side of the industry versus the CRO side of the industry where whereas you know, on the CRO side, one of the one of the things that's exciting is you see so many different molecules from so many different therapeutic areas and, and cross love to well it's our whole business is supporting pharma generally. Can you talk about for me you said you manage some of the CRO relationships what what that role is in for CRO supporting a company like, like Caravelle.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So one of my most fundamental important aspects of working with Cros is I try and incorporate the CRO partners into my team. You know, some sponsors have a real like stand off. They don't tell you anything about the drug, They don't want you to know any information or background and they treat you more like a service provider. I really prefer to really integrate the CRO partner into our team in a really strong way. We identify favorite scientists we work with and request them over and over because that relationship is really, really important. And so I would say the number one thing that I do and I believe is I think is best practice is to treat the CRO just like an extension of your own company because there are extremely capable scientists and crows and not taking it. Advantage of that expertise is a huge mistake.
Chad:
Yeah. One one of the things that I learned, as you know, in the Sierra industry is when you get those deeper relationships, I completely agree it's the way it should be. But I also learned that seeing deeper inside of what goes on in the in the pharma company or the or the biotech or whatever you want to classify it as, you also see more of the noise. And it was interesting with a big relationship I had a few years ago with a company because we saw more of that noise. So we wanted to see deeper into the pipeline, but then you see more of the noise and and I didn't I don't think I had fully realized how much noise in terms of start dates for trials, different drugs and all these different pieces that my pharma contacts, if you will, in my pharma project managers or bioanalytical lab directors or whatever the role was, they were filtering out so much of that. Oh yeah, for us.
Dr. Rick:
So yeah, yeah. It's, you know, because I worked in a CRO on the CRO side, on the, on the service provider side, you only see the frustration of study start dates changing constantly and drug delivery dates changing constantly. And you don't really understand or know why. You just think the partner is being irritating.
Chad:
Yeah.
Dr. Rick:
And then when you start to see it on the, the sponsor side of the business and you see it's all about the complexity of that noise, as you call it, in terms of, you know, production didn't go well for material that you need for this study or priorities are shifting at the company. You know, they can't find clinical sites to enable a study. So all of that complexity and that drug development process does get filtered out for the CRO a lot of times. So it's good when you see that chaos.
Chad:
Yeah, sometimes I go overly nerdy with the way I think of things as you know, and I think of these like, like a Fourier transform. A Fourier transform goes from the time domain to the frequency domain and you, you apply Fourier transform. And I've always thought that you see this decay of, of noise down as time goes on, you see this reduction in noise. And I for some reason when I, when I see that, I always think of how that works. So anyways, probably over the top nerdy.
Dr. Rick:
It's nice to know that you're still a math nerd.
Chad:
I appreciate that. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. So, Rick, if you if you were to not be in the CNS development space for pharmaceutical industry, like if somebody said or maybe even said, hey, maybe you maybe you nail it at Sara with a couple of big drugs and then some years down the road, you want to move into a different development space. What what area of drug development would you want to work in?
Dr. Rick:
I have worked in cardiovascular metabolic diseases in the past, and I think those that area actually has a lot of opportunities still. It's pretty well taken care of. But if you look at the number one cause for mortality in the United States, it's still cardiovascular disease for the most part. Yeah. And so although there's a lot of medication for various conditions, there's still a lot of space, I think, for doing better and understanding those areas better. And, you know, diabetes is a huge growing problem in our country as well. And so I think the diabetes, metabolic cardiovascular space would be very interesting.
Chad:
Yeah, cool. So one of the areas that I like to talk to folks about is also mentoring. And it's a little bit again, it's outside of our our regular drug development talk. But I'm curious how you've taken that role on or any any great mentors that you've had in the industry along the way that have influenced you that you might tell us about lessons you've learned or or lessons you might share for for others in that in that space?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So I think that's super important. So it's a great, great topic. So I would say I try very hard to mentor people that have a lot of potential and those that don't really see their own potential. Those are the people I really, really enjoy mentoring. To try and get them outside of their comfort zone is what I always tell them. And it's not even the people that I'm a direct line manager for. At Merck. For a number of years I participated in an a formalized mentoring program at Merck, where we would get paired up with a more junior scientist working with those through that program. But also just informally, we have college interns at our company, so mentoring the college intern. I stay in contact with some of them over the years and I just think it's super important to help give them that perspective. How to make decisions for their career. Along the way, I benefited from a lot of really important people in my career. You know, from my PhD advisor at the University of Oklahoma, Dave Garvin, Gary Dunbar at Central Michigan University, who I mentioned my. Stock advisor Gail Wenger at University of Michigan. You know, those early those early years were super important to helping me get established. And then through my career in the industry, you know, I haven't really had what I would consider a real long term mentor, but it's always been people that have kind of taken me under their wing to help me really advance in different ways that I never expected.
Chad:
Yeah. And I think, well, we're both north of 50 now, and I don't know about you, but I bet I've started to feel like, all right, while I've mentored and trained and supported people, I started feeling like I'm really getting to that give back mode of my career. And in fact, I was at I was at a conference last week, and I'll admit I started feeling like the old guy because I started telling all these stories and I started realizing they were, you know, the the folks I was, you know, giving advice and talking about how to navigate the meeting and see this person's talk because they're, you know, they'll give a fantastic talk. I started realizing, you know, they they maybe were in kindergarten when, you know, when I when I first started building some of these relationships or younger or younger in some cases. So I'm sure I'm sure you've experienced that as well. And you've been involved in a number of societies over the years as well. I know you were in the safety pharmacology society. And what else tell me about your experience being involved in in different organizations like that and how that's impacted.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah, so I've been I think scientific society involvement is super important for scientists on a number of levels. It helps advance the field, it gives visibility to the field, it helps advance you professionally as an individual, but also helps mentor junior scientists. The Safety pharmacology society is sort of my favorite society, so to speak, mainly because I got involved very early in my career while that society was just forming. It's only been around for a little over 20 years now. I served on the board of directors for that society for several years, and I was also a president of the society back in 2009. And so that really helped me, you know, network in a global way. It's an international society. I met lots of people. It really helped give me a perspective of how others are doing things. Drug development is a super complex business and you know, there's 100 ways you can accomplish the same task. And it's important to broaden your understanding of other people's methodologies, and societies really help foster that.
Chad:
So as a younger brother, I've always been pretty good at trying to get you in trouble. So I stayed out of trouble. So I'm going to ask you a question for for mom and dad. What's the what's the number one lesson you learned from mom? And what's the number one lesson you learned from dad?
Dr. Rick:
Oh, boy, that's a really good one. So, you know, I think from from mom, I learned to be a tenacious, never give up fighter when it comes to accomplishing a project. And, you know, one of the things I really learned from her was when you say you're going to do something. Failure is not an option. And so I really learned that, and that served me well over the years. It does cause some stress, but, you know, it's helped me fight through a lot of really challenging drug development problems over the years. So I would say that that's definitely something I got from mom, from dad. I really got, I think, a different perspective on, you know, how to deal with people. He's a real people person. And one of the things that scientists really lack a lot of times is the ability to really interact with people in a sort of a way that's more social. And I think I really I really got a lot of that from him.
Chad:
So I had mentioned to you that I was going to ask you a couple surprise questions, if you will, but you said, Hey, you should ask me what what's my dirtiest job ever. And so I have to ask because now I'm really curious. So. So what was your dirtiest job you ever did?
Dr. Rick:
Yeah. So I have two particularly dirty jobs. So one dirty job was one that you also did was detest selling corn. And so if you're from seed corn territory in the Midwest and you're a 15 year old kid, you need a job in the summer, you detest corn, or at least that's what we used to do. That was a pretty dirty job, spending, you know, long days in a corn field full of mud and dirt and wet and everything that goes with that.
Chad:
Wet in the morning and dry in the afternoon.
Dr. Rick:
Yeah, absolutely.
Chad:
And when we were doing it, no bathrooms in the field.
Dr. Rick:
No, no. Why would you have bathrooms for for child labor. So that was one that was one dirty job. And if none of the listeners know. Haunted hassling is they should just Google it and then they'll see and they'll think we're crazy for having done it. The other dirty job I had was in college. I did commercial construction as a laborer for a while and I spent basically the whole summer cutting concrete with a big concrete sore and getting myself covered in concrete dust, jack hammering and literally digging ditches all summer long. That was pretty dirty. I would come home every day, completely covered in concrete, dust and dirt and mud, and really learned how to work physically very hard. Also was a really good encouragement to stay in college.
Chad:
Yeah, well, without a doubt. Without a doubt, Rick is I've really enjoyed chatting with, you know, and I find it interesting when I do these discussions because I've certainly recruited a lot of guests. There were people I thought I knew well, and I always learn new things about them and new insights and yeah, that that goes for, for me today talking with you. Certainly you've been a fantastic big brother mentor to me over the years. Thank you for that. Thank you for joining the podcast today. Is there anything else that you want to add or any any closing comments that you might have before? Before we head off.
Dr. Rick:
I would just say that I think probably most of the people that you interview are in the pharmaceutical business of some sort, and most of the listeners are probably also similar in the pharmaceutical industry. And I just want to thank everybody for working to bring medicines to patients that need them. Patients are waiting for new therapies and our job is to get that done. And so I would just hope that everybody works with a sense of urgency and thoughtfulness, and that's what we can all do as an industry together.
Chad:
Without a doubt. Well, thanks so much, Rick. And that's all for this episode of Molecular Moments. If you enjoyed today's episode, be sure to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app so you never miss a conversation. If you'd like to hang out with us outside of the podcast, we have many webinars and other presentations available for your enjoyment and education. Visit bio agility Dexcom to see what's coming up and how you can stay in touch. And don't forget to keep an eye out for more episodes coming soon. We're looking forward to some great guests from across the Bioanalytical field and the Pharmaceutical development.
Narrator:
Thanks for listening to the Molecular Moments podcast.
Sonix has many features that you'd love including automated translation, automated subtitles, share transcripts, enterprise-grade admin tools, and easily transcribe your Zoom meetings. Try Sonix for free today.
Share This 
